Thomas Aquinas Argument From Motion

1083 Words5 Pages
Thomas Aquinas was a Dominican priest who tries to use rational thought to give evidence to a primordial being known through most religions as God. Born sometime around the emergence of the Renaissance, there was a push to question everything and follow rational thought instead of blind faith. Despite the fact that the Catholic Church was the prime donor to the art and architecture, many people began to turn away from the religious aspects of society towards the more secular scientific part. Aquinas, trying to match the reasoning of his time, used five proofs called the Summa Theologica to provide scientific reason behind the fact that there is a God. Instead of using faith or going solely based on his beliefs, he tries to argue there has to be a God for the universe to exist. Thomas Aquinas’ arguments do prove that there needs to be an original being (or force) for the universe to come into existence; however, some of his arguments do falter to scrutiny. The first three arguments do hold water in the sense that is follows scientific reasoning, then draws to a conclusion that would resolve the argument. The first way describes the “Argument from Motion,” which basically follows Newton’s First Law of Motion. “An object at rest will remain at rest unless acted on by an unbalanced force. An object in motion continues in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force” (Newton’s Laws of Motion). This accepted scientific law proves that something cannot move itself, meaning nothing in the universe can be in movement without that first mover that has always been in motion. Aquinas surmises this “first…show more content…
There may be some mistakes in his assertions every once in a while, but he effectively conveys his beliefs through reasoning instead of
Open Document